>> yes. this last year, 82% graduated and pursued degrees as well. advance degrees, graduate degrees. here's the key point. it's individual choice. what is the culture. that's the responsibility of the university. does the university create a culture that encourages the student to do the best that he or she can. there are obviously important issues to address...

>> thank you. mr. miller. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i assume you weren't calling for a larger bargaining unit? >> no, i was not, but it does raise, mr. miller -- >> i appreciate that. i want to make it clear. >> continuity of interests, the community of interests. >> mr. eilers i want that thank you very much for your testimony because you testified in very straightforward manner about the issues that the students at northwestern were raising that are endemic, i believe to the football programs around the

country. that really was, as you pointed out, security of your scholarship, four-year scholarship as opposed year to year that can be used against a weapon at a student or performance or add somebody else to the squad. health and insurance benefits. the concern when you're injured or you suffered disability as a result of that, or you lose your athletic ability or scholarship, these things start to accumulate on some students. the stipend issue that you raised, and transfer issue, these are the issues that these students felt necessary to form a union around because they weren't getting satisfaction. i suspect you would find that if you traveled to most college campuses that had sports programs, that students feel they're caught up in a cog and they're only there for four years, five years, whatever period of time and they're not being addressed. i find it interesting that other witnesses are have held their testimony to that notion and that's their belief this is a

student athlete. these, your student athletes at northwestern said, what about the athletic side of it? what about where we spend 50 hours a week? what is this imposition on us and what security do we have? and apparently that can never quite get addressed and mr. schwarz, that brings me to you. if you, if you read mr. live spring ton's testimony you -- livingston's testimony, why this intricate work between conferences and ncaa and colleges, maybe even the media, would not be a shield against issues raised by this bargaining unit. they could travel all over and even have them going into the academic side but that same network is used as a weapon against the athletes. >> that's right. >> that same network is used as a weapon when they want to talk about, as is our stipend fair? because they don't have any voice at all. then, well, the school is happy

giving you four-year, that is not every school in the league, maybe not in the pac 12, i don't know. we have to check with the conference. the conference, well, we're bound by the rules. also remember today what conference you get in, conferences are like commodities. they're moving them around to generate tv revenues. no longer allegiance to the fan or old rivalries. it is about what revenues generated mid-week, weekend playoffs. want to explain a little bit, if you're a handful of students in the northwestern program how you're going to be heard and how you are going to get results during your career? >> sure. if i could address a couple of things, one of the statements i heard here that baylor treats all of its student athletes the same. that is not true. there is a cap how many students can receive scholarships. and walk-ons are prohibited from receiving scholarships. so there already in some sense a

caste system that is the term mr. muir used describing paying athletes that distinguishes between scholarship athletes and other athletes would get a scholarship if the school were allowed to exercise individual choice. instead there is cap that prevents it. directly to your point, the way i like to think about the claim that schools are poor in their athletic departments is that it is similar to say like wall street banker who brings in million dollars of salary, but maybe been divorced twice so he has alimony payments, maybe kids are in college. maybe has a couple mortgages. once he is done paying for all those things there is not a lot of money left, wall street banking doesn't pay that well. >> that is sort of a point the knight commission found in 2010. there is not enough money to provide those scholarships. there is not enough money to help the other points but as they pointed out escalating coaches salaries are creating

unsustainable growth of athletic expenses. so can bury $7 million into a coach's salary, $3 million to the coach's salary, i understand that is exception but more and more are joining that fraternity but then you plead poor mouth you can't quite take care of your athletic obligations campus-wide. i think we see here that the ncaa has conduct ad very, very interesting and overwhelming network to be used against these kinds of questions being raised, even commission as prominent as the knight commission that examinedded this impact and the relationship, if you will of student athletes. that's why these students chose to become employees because they recognize the situation as they were in. classical employer, employee relationship. thank you. >> gentleman's time has expired. i ask unanimous consent to submit a letter from the american council on education which warns treating student athletes as employees, quote, would have a range of negative

and troubling consequences. >> submit for the record an article from the stanford daily. student athletes have access to easy courses. >> without objection. both will be entered into the record. >> dr. fox. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and i want to thank all of her witnesses here today. you've provided some fascinating information to us and i'm grateful to you, someone who spent a lot of time in education and higher education, dealt with student athletes and students who weren't athletes. so i appreciate the information. judge starr, i understand baylor's priority is education. in fact all of you have talked about that. would you describe how baylor's athletic programs work with the academic programs to insure student athlete's can prioritize their studies while also meeting their commitments to the team? >> one of the keys, dr. foxx, is

the planning process that goes into developing the major planning and schedule and student athletes do have priority in terms of registration. so we do not have a crowding out kind of question at all. so throughout the academic year there is a careful monitoring of that student's progress and if there are issues being identified, then those issues are going to be addressed. i think that's why we've seen a steady increase in recent years, even before my watch, but it is point of personal emphasis on my watch, that we want the student athletes to have that entire reservoir of support, and that's why the gpa, cumulative gpa averages 3.27. very labor intensive and very student athlete specific focused activity. >> i'm assuming you have study

halls? >> as elsewhere, mandatory for first years for freshmen. and then there are abundant study facilities available. they're very conveniently located as part of our simpson high yes, sir academic center. >> let me come back to the opinion. he includes restrictions placed on athletes. he says they have to obtain permission from the coaches before applying for outside employment, posting items on the internet and speaking to media. they're also prohibited from using alcohol and drugs and engaging in gambling. judge, this may sound like a silly question but please tell me why you placed these restrictions on student athletes? >> well, it is in fact to create a team culture and also to insure, as best we can, appropriate behavior. dr. foxx, when the student

athlete ariffs he or she is presented with the student athletic handbook an the earliest pages say, here is the kind of behavior that is forbidden because it reflects poorly on the university, it reflects poorly on the team and frankly destructive of the culture of the team. so yes, there are a number of prohibitions but they're all grounded in human experience. these are things that student athlete should not be doing. >> some of these things are things no student should be doing, correct. >> that is correct. one of the things when you go through the thou shall not list, it is in very fact comparable to any other student. they're obviously some athletic-specific activity but it is in fact a community of rules that we're in a community together and these are the rules that bind us all. >> right. i would like to ask you this question. then if mr. muir has an opportunity to respond to it also, i would appreciate it.

we know that the decision made by the nlrb gentleman has implications beyond the nlra. it has implications for title ix of the education amendments of 1972, workers compensation laws, tax law, fair labor standards act. could all be implicated. would you tell us your thoughts on the possible implication of these laws for baylor and then mr. muir, for stanford? >> i think they're very serious issues with respect to title ix in particular. if the football scholarship student athletes are all employees, then in fact that is going to create a very serious issues in terms of imbalance with respect to what title ix requires. there are going to be a host of other issues as well. injuries are important. health is very important. we're very sensitive to that and therefore the question will be triggered, does osha have jurisdiction in this context as

well? so i think it is going to raise a hornets necessary of issues. >> i believe if we go down that path, first and foremost, our students are students first and we want to insure many of the issues that northwestern student athletes raise are issues we're already covering at stanford. think if we go down the path eventually we call our students, student athletes employees and they become a true working employer working relationship then i do think some of those things as title ix and making sure we provide a broad offering for all of our students becomes at risk. the pressures become greater. >> gentlelady's time has expired. mr. bishop. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman and to our panel thank you for your testimony. mr. aislers, particularly i want to particular your testimony that you highlighted issues i want to talk about. you described effort at northwestern as a means to an

end. i think it is also fair to describe it as a cry for help. i think that we talk about having student athlete's interest at the center of what we do. i used to run a college so, division ii school but there is nobody really talking for the students and i think what is happening at northwestern this is an effort to get somebody to listen. so i want to address this to judge starr and to mr. muir. you both represent highly-regarded, very prestige just institutions that have -- pest teen just institutions that succeeded on athletic field and the classroom. you both are members of very large conferences and i want to just go over what the players at northwestern are asking for. they're asking for efforts to minimize college athletes brain trauma risks. they're asking to prevent players from being stuck paying sports-related medical expenses. they're asking that graduation rates increase.

they're asking that educational opportunities for student athletes in good standing be protected. they're asking that universities be prohibited from using a permanent injury suffered during athletics as reason to reduce or eliminate a scholarship. they're asking to establish and enforce uniform safety guidelines? all sports to help prevent serious injuries and avoidable deaths. they're asking to prohibit the punishment of college athletes that have not committed a crime. is there anyone on that list that just mentioned that is unreasonable? is there any piece of that, that your institution would say, no, i'm awful sorry, we can't do that? or let me phrase it postively. would you each be willing to lead an effort in your respective conferences to see to it that your fellow member institutions say, absolutely, guys, you're absolutely right, we're going to do it, it's the right thing to do? >> mr. bishop, i think that that series of questions, they are in

fact important. they are legitimate and we are in fact continually working toward addressing them. take the concussion policy. the ncaa does have a concussion policy and requires members to, of our conference requires it and we have a concussion policy. we continually monitor that. there are studies underway from the university of virginia and the ncaa and has personally, has directly funded a study that -- so this is involving science. so, yes, we want -- >> here's my question. >> yes. >> i'm sorry, i don't mean to be rude. i have only five minutes. should we not, if, unionization is as bad as so many of you think it is, should we not use this as a catalyst, not just talk about conversations and not just talk about yes, we're looking at it, let's do it? you are very powerful institutions, in very powerful conferences that people look to

for leadership. can you not just say, we're going to lead an effort to make this happen? >> again, briefly, i believe it is happening. can we move for quickly? of course, you could always move more quickly you about it is fact a serious conversation. these myriad issues you rightly raised are under serious review and it's not just a conversation. things are happening. ncaa, cost of attendance -- >> i want to give mr. muir a chance, my question in these conversations who is speaking for the student athlete? >> i would say there is a multiple of individuals are speaking for the student athletes including student athletes themselves. we hear a number of our constituencies, both on and off campus saying we need the student athlete's voice. certainly we're being attentive to that. our presidents are at the table. they're constantly thinking about this. they're trying to take leadership roles as you mentioned. athletic directors, i was at an

athletic directors meeting yesterday. this is common discussion point. we want to make sure the student athlete's experience is best as it possibly can be and we need to enhance it. >> i hope somehow collectively to the point where we hold student athletes, hold coaches to the same standards we hold student athletes. a coach can break a contract with impunity. when you left yale university you had to sit out a year. i don't understand why it that's a coach can break a contract with impunity and student athlete is penalized if he wants to move from one institution to another institution that he thinks better serves his needs. mr. aislers, you want -- ehlers want to comment on that? >> congressman bishop, i do think, i don't understand why we can't get there, people should go to college to get degrees first and foremost, full stop. part of their educational experience for me was at least participating in a sports-related program, just like someone would do drama, speech, debate, what have you.

it made me who i am today. it made me a better father, a better husband, a better person, a better business person. so it is, i would disagree with mr. schwarz's characterization that separate and distinct from your educational experience. i think it is integral like any of those things and what we need to do is make sure student athletes have the ability to go to an institution for four years and earn a degree and leave with a degree. so if that is the case, i would respectfully disagree that there should be some quid pro quo. that person should make a commitment to that coach to give them four years of service coming out of high school. if we don't do that, though, i then i would submit to you, what you're suggesting, that we should allow people to then flow around, they should be equal. i want a two-way street to be, to be equal for both parties. >> gentleman's time has expired. dr. roe. >> thanks very much, mr. chairman. just to clarify a couple things mr. schwarz started with.

full disclosure, the head basketball coach and athletic director where i went to college, dave luce, did both jobs for a long time this is a mid division i school. i'm absolutely committed to college act ticks. i donated money to build athletic center at the college. mr. schwarz, you pointed out how much money, i agree ncaa does, and most don't live at lofty level. most colleges lose money at athletics. they don't make money. big areas do, big schools do. at austin peay nine million dollar budget, not $90 million budget this unionization at a private university, not a state university but student athletes, mr. eiler such, i totally agree with you. mr. bishop, you can transfer without loss of a time, if you transfer at different level. if you go from division i to

division ii up you can play immediately, to clarify that for everyone. either mr. livingston or maybe, judge starr, this ruling, what means me is at least i played sports it was fun. we sound like it is some kind after drudgery. golf is sometimes but are to the most part sports are fun. that's why you play sports. and as mr. eilers clearly said, he added his experience at a student athlete, it made him better, he mentioned it very eloquently, that's what it did for me. i learned a lot on the playing field i would have never learned in the classroom. so i think it is additive. do you think this ruling could potentially cause schools just to drop football or sports? >> well, we have to consider all options in terms of the best interests. i know the president of university of delaware said, he was a student athlete himself

that the university of delaware would not be able to continue. that is public university. it is raising a host of serious questions. i think it could in fact at a minimum cause programmatic curtailments. it raises issues we talked about under title ix. how do you achieve very important balance to achieve as a matter of policy and as a matter of law. it is simply the wrong way to go to address these very important issues. the number of questions that are raised are so myriad, they are just remarkably wide-ranging. i don't think there is a real answer for most of these questions. the fair labor standards act is yet another. antitrust laws themselves. that were emphasized earlier. so it is bringing us into a sea of complete uncertainty. >> i agree. of. go ahead. anyone else? >> if i might add, the issue that mr. schwarz talked about in

terms of the protection for entire leagues where they all belong under one collective bargaining agreement is absolutely correct for professional sports. that does not exist in college sports. nlrb would only govern 17 out of the 120 schools that play football. so you end up with potential arms race for those that can afford it and others as the judge may decide to make a decision to get rid of it. sports are competitive. so the teams that want to win are going to pay their way up to win. >> i think if northwestern unionizes they will play 12 homecoming games i think what they're going to do. in the event the student athlete unionizes and parties can't agree on terms and conditions of employment, is it possible the union athletes will strike? >> that is traditional tool and collective bargaining idea that

is unthinkable, but what the non-scholarship athletes? that is incoherence the collective bargaining agreement. what if they walk on class if they're employees, what is the relationship to the academic enterprise? >> mr. eilers i will give you final comment. you said it when i was in college, the students were true student-athletes. our quarterback had 4.0 as physics math major. you were obviously a incredible athlete that you played professional football. you are if you got into the professional leagues. your comments are absolutely spot on. you should look at student-athlete, you point out some students play in the band and they practice for hours. some go to rotc. they work very hard in drama and other things. so i will give you the final say on this. >> actually the gentleman's time has expired. brilliant timing.

mr. courtney. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i think listening to the testimony, most people i think would agree that what happened at northwestern because the ncaa has create advantage couple in terms of students being treated fairly and if you look at the mission statement of the college athlete's players association, one of the mission statement items is provide better due process in sanction actions. i represent the university of connecticut. we had a very exciting spring. shabazz napier made two incredible, i think courageous comments during the course of the lead-up to the tournament. number one, describing in a way that might be embarrassing to some that sometimes he went to bed hungry at night. that is because of the nickel and dime, mickey mouse ncaa rules in terms of defining what universities could provide to students. i mean it was kind of almost comical to see mr. emmert rush

to design a new rule on april 15th that changed and reformed that. not because of what mr. napier said, for a lot of us, seems at sometimes only things that changes ncaa is external pressure. frankly i think that is what this event at northwestern kind of produced, we wouldn't have this to talk about plight of students but for actions of those students. frankly there are other times when these sanctions process is far more pernicious than maybe missing a midnight snack. you know, we look at what mr. napier said this is what happens when you ban us. the due process, and you use that term loosely, that the ncaa engages, unfortunately far too many times shoots the bystander in an effort to comport with some measure of student athletes. that school was banned because of a cohort of students who had poor academic performance and

there is no one is going to dispute that in 2007. not one player on that team was around at the university when those scores triggered an apr finding that with a four year look-back period. yet they found themselves in a situation they were banned from post-season play because of a rule that makes absolutely no sense. by the way, other schools are doing one and done, system which, you know, try to explain that to the average person why that's okay and yet a student like shabazz napier is punished? he will graduate in couple weeks. he is getting his full degree. he is getting punished for somebody that he never even knew was at stores seven years earlier in tomorrows of performance. i'm very skeptical frankly of the protections for students who get swept up in this bizarre, byzantine system of trying to comport with some definition of student athletes. with all due respect to the

witnesses here i don't think the colleges and universities because they have their own pressures in terms of not rocking the boat with the ncaa, to really step up and provide, real, honest to god advocacy for students getting swept up. perry jones iii was disqualified at baylor because his mother took three small loans when he was a high school sophomore before even went to baylor. yet he was punished later on in his college career because his mother was in desperate financial situation, took a short-term loan from aau coach. no one wants to vouch for that. nonetheless, why would he get punished for that except for the ncaa's desperate attempt to try to somehow comport with definition of student athletes? mr. schwarz, i guess, we talk about treating people with dignity because that is what is really so offensive the way, ncaa violated patient rights in that miami investigation. i mean the power that they can

exert, again tramples on people's ability to even just have basic due process rights when these sanction hearings and investigations. i was wondering if you can sort of put your comments in that context? >> sure. i think it's a great step that the ncaa started saying if a school wants to give an athlete a meal they're allowed to. previously the individual choice to feed an athlete was prohibited beyond a certain number of meals. and that's the level of cartel control we see here. you're exactly right the issue is not whether a benevolent organization will dayne to provide the people who bring value with some crumbs, it is voice or advocacy. i don't know how often james brown is quoted, i don't want nobody to give me nothing. open up the door, i will get it myself. that is effectively what the movement is, saying give us some avenue. let us come in, it is an ncaa

violation to come in and ask for money, as an example. you get permanently banned. >> the gentleman's time has expired, i want to commend that the gentleman from connecticut to get bragging without mentioning basketball word. dr. desjarlais. >> thank you, sir, bringing your expertise. i want to go to mr. livingston first. ask a few questions. . .

>> the nlra, as you know, covers organizing roles, bargaining unit determinations, subject of bargaining and the right to engage in economic action. all those differ under various state laws. for example, some prohibit public sector bargaining entirely. others permit public sector bargaining on very limited terms. others don't have the right to engage in economic action. others, for example, would have interest arbitration. so you would have different subjects being negotiated by different groups in different collective bargaining agreements. it, ultimately, would end up with individual bargaining and an unlevel playing field, different terms, different contracts. then when those teams compete -- unlike in professional sports -- you've got something that i simply don't think is workable. >> okay, yeah, i think that's an

important point, that if scholarship athletes do organize, the universities will bargain over terms and conditions of employment, and parties are compelled to bargain over mandatory subjects of bargaining. what terms are mandatory subjects of bargaining? >> i appreciate the comments, but we've heard from everyone today about the need for college athletics to improve. and to improve the life of their student athlete. but whether it's the college athletes' players association or any other union, and, of course, any other union has the right to organize, under the national labor relations act, they could bargain about a wide variety of things. the statute is wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment. that's so broad that it would cover compensation, signing bonuses, retention bonuses, hours of work. so in terms of schedules, potentially even class

attendance. while campus goals may be limited right now, if they're eventually certified as some organization based on member desires, maybe they become greater. and, of course, any other union wouldn't be limited to the goals that we've heard today. >> in the event that student athlete ares unionize -- athletes unionize, they'll pay due toss the union, where do these payments come from? >> dues are an internal union matter, so how they decide to do it is up to them. but under section 302 of the labor management relations act, it's clear that an employer -- in this case, the university -- can't pay it. an employer would have to bargain over checkoff, for example, but that comes from wages. and so unless we're talking about wages in some form, the unions would have to answer that. kappa or any other union. >> we've touched briefly earlier on taxation, these universities and organizations are tax-exempt. if a student becomes an employer, are they then subject to taxation?

and if so, does that affect pell grants, ability to get student loans? where do we go -- how do we go down that road? >> you're beyond my area of expertise, but i do believe that others perhaps can answer that question. >> does somebody else have a comment on that? >> well, section 61 of the internal revenue code has a very capacious definition of what is income. so if an individual is an employee, then very strong arguments, it's unsettled. obviously, this is a new question, but it's going to open up serious questions about the entire range of services including the scholarship itself. there are issues presently with respect to how a scholarship is treated. but if they are employees, then it's compensation, and it's presumptively taxable. >> and if they are employees and you presume that they would have to pay taxes on it, i would presume that the goal withs of any scholarship -- goals of any

scholarship negotiations, wage negotiations would be to increase that amount to take into account the tax consequences. >> okay. thank you. i yield back. >> gentleman yields back. ms. fudge. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. and thank you all for being here today. just want to make a couple of comments about things that i've heard in your earlier testimony. want to go back to something my colleague, mr. courtney, said. i happen to have attended ohio state university. i knew a lot of the football players when i was in school. this issue was a problem then, it is an issue today. so why has it not been taken care of in more than 30 years? there is no reason for it. and but for the courageous actions of these young men, we wouldn't be talking about it today. so i want to put that on the record. and for you, mr. livingston, you talked about the ohio statehouse who has determined that our athletes are not employees. just because they said it doesn't make it so. these are the same people that want to restrict voting rights. so just because they said that doesn't make it so.

as well we do know that student athletes, that scholarship athletes are treated differently than those not on scholarship. we know it, and we just need to admit it and not even pretend there's some difference. the restrictions they have and the time commitment is much different than students who are nonscholarship students. first question i'd really like to ask mr. schwartz. in your written testimony, you mentioned the level of profit the naa -- i mean, the ncaa is making off its student athletes. do you know if any of that profit is dedicated in any way to providing health benefits to those students? >> some of it is. i mean, most on-field injuries the immediate cost of that injury is covered. it's not required, but it is covered. long-term injuries that linger typically are less likely to be covered. so it's not always the case. could i just add one quick thing real fast? >> very quickly. >> you mentioned that since you were in college there's been a cost about the --

[inaudible] the reason there aren't cost of attendance stipends is because the ncaa voted them away in 1973. they've been claiming they've been talking about bringing them back now since 1973. in 1986, something was tried, they didn't pass it. now they're telling you, oh, it's coming real soon. there's been a long history of it's coming real soon. >> well, thank you. the ncaaa also doesn't want these young people to make a living, the little bit that they can as well. i was around when the whole scandal at ohio state came around about them selling their shirts. i won't go to that one. but i would like to ask mr. starr and mr. muir, what are your football and basketball coaches make annually? >> i don't have the number off the top of my head. it is substantial, it is a free market, and so we want to keep our coaches. we've had stability -- >> [inaudible] >> i can get those for you. >> would you, please? mr. muir. >> i'm not at liberty to share

the numbers -- >> is it a secret? >> it's just something that we don't share at stanford. >> okay, thank you. that's the only thing i wanted to ask you. yes, sir. >> i know the answer for baylor, in 2011 $2.4 million, scott drew made $2.1, and the women's basketball coach made $1.3 million. at stanford the number isn't published, but in the one year jim harbaugh made a little over $1 million. >> thank you very much. mr. starr, you mentioned earlier that, obviously, the goal of attending a college or university is to obtain a degree. i'm assuming we agree on that point. >> yes, we do. >> okay. but do you also realize that for division i football athletes that, and men's basketball players, their graduation rates across the board hover around 50%? >> at baylor it's higher. at baylor it's 62% for our men's basketball team, but i could not agree more, ms. fudge. we need to create especially in

men's basketball but to a considerable degree in football as well this culture of student athlete. and it begins with the coaches, it begins with the head coach. but the entire infrastructure has to be oriented toward that. the same time these are young men and young women who are making their own choices. they decide what's important for them. all we can do is create a culture that, of encouragement and of genuine support. >> thank you very much. i see my time is going -- i'll yield back, mr. chairman. thank you. thank you, all. >> i thank the gentlelady. dr. pew shop, you're recognized. >> thank you very much. i'll be brief. anyone can answer this question. did, do athletic scholarships give potential academic opportunities to students who otherwise would not have them available to them because of sheerly based on their ability to play a sport?

mr. muir? >> yeah, i would say that the opportunity to attend an institution like stanford, to be afforded the opportunity to both compete at the highest level as well as get a quality education, we had less than 5% be admitted this past year, 40,000 applications. and so when our coaches present young people with an opportunity to come and compete at stanford, it's a wonderful experience, and i think our kids as soon as they get in the door understand and cherish that opportunity. and as i said with the high graduation rate, they understand that they're part of the fabric of the place. >> thank you. there's a -- >> [inaudible] >> there's a significant opportunity for first generation college attendees, so it is a door opener. it has been historically. i believe the ncaa has said that approximately 15% of student athletes who receive scholarships are first generation. no one has attended college in their family, so it's a great part of the american story. >> when thank you. i'll just have a brief comment: i think we all here today,

people testifying and members on both sides, know that there are substantial issues we're discussing today, and i'm hopeful this discussion will continue and make things better for and improvements to our college athletic system so that young people across the country can continue to compete but also as many of you have outlined more importantly, have access to an educational experience that helps them in their future careers and down the line. so with that, i yield back. >> gentleman yields back. ms. bone mitch chi. -- bonamici. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i appreciate your expertise, all of the witnesses who are here today. mr. islers -- did i say your name correctly? >> you did. >> you talked about how to debate should be the best way to address the goal, and i really appreciate that. i know some of my colleagues have mentioned the importance of addressing the goals that the

college athletes have set out. i was reading an editorial that came out after the regional director's opinion that said that the college 130r9s establishment -- college sports establishment has brought this trouble on itself by not moving to address players' legitimate grievances. obviously, the regional director found some differences between what north western is doing and what you've described in your experience and, of course, mr. muir and judge starr. i wanted to ask just a quick question. i know, mr. eilers, you said you went, you have an mba from keg keg -- kellogg school, but you're not representing northwestern. mr. livingston, do you happen to represent northwestern? >> i do not. >> i was just curious was we've heard -- because we've heard different experiences and different facts about your colleges, like, mr. muir, what stanford is doing. but what we're talking about is a decision that's specific to northwestern, and one of the things that the regional

director found was that the scholarship players are identified and recruited in the first instance because of their football prowess and not because of their academic achievement in high school. is that similar, mr. muir, you're shaking your head no. is that different from your experience at stanford? >> that is definitely different when i think about what our coaches are doing and identifying young people to potentially come to stanford. as i said earlier, the first process they have to, the hurdle they have to go through is making sure that they can pass admissions and make sure that they can enter school just like the general student. so we are weeding out individuals because if they don't have the academic record, doesn't matter what their athletic accomplishments are. if they're not able to in order to meet the needs of insuring a great education, that's not going to happen. >> and i've been trying to figure out from reading part of the regional director's opinion, what happens if a class that a

player, a scholarship player wants to take because of his major, or i should say his or her major because maybe this could be expanded to women's sports as well, what happens if that class conflicts with practice? what does the college do? >> so when i attend a practice, when i see our student athletes practicing, getting ready for competition, there's many a time where i'll see our football student athletes specifically walk off the field because they're attending a lab, attending a class, and that comes first. >> and they're not penalized for that? >> they're not. >> they're i permitted to do that? >> those are kids who will play on saturdays as well too. >> was that your experience too, mr. eilers? >> it was. and there are sacrifices made. so i took organic chemistry one summer, right? between my sophomore and junior year because of that fact and trying to take the labs. i would only submit one additional item which is i think what stanford's done is incredible in football and what they do on the academic front,

accomplishing both. there was a brief moment in time before we ran into an unfortunate game against alabama in the national championship, i was most proud of notre dame having the highest graduation rate for the football players as well as briefly being ranked number one in the country. so you can do both. >> well, it's interesting because the regional director, i believe, found that northwestern has 97% graduation rate for its players. which seems to be pretty high. i wanted to ask also about what happens during the recruitment process? because i mentioned what the finding was about northwestern, that they were recruited because of their football prowess. but what happens during that recruitment process? how are the perspective athletes actually made aware of all of the opportunities that are available to them? how do they decide what they're considering during that consideration process?

they will lose their scholarship if they don't stay on the team? mr. muir? maybe, judge starr, you could respond to that as well. >> first of all, in terms of the recruitment process, i have personally seen what that process looks like, and it includes a very thorough introduction to here's the academic support. they will meet people from the academic support staff. they will see -- and we try to determine is there a diagnostic testing issue. that's done by the university. but in terms of any learning disability. so there is a very holistic introduction to the university as6i a whole including the academic side. and usually the parents or parent or loved one is there with the perspective student athlete. >> thank you. my time has expired. i yield back. >> thank the gentlelady.o! mr. rah key that. >> thank you, mr. chair. thank the gentlemen for your testimony today. you know, i think from what i heard judge starr kind of, as he would being a former judge, kind

of really clarified the issue, and that is are we going to use the nlra as a vehicle for the improvements that you've all talked about today. i suspect, no. i can't imagine the authors of the law or the intent of congress was to cover this situation. but let's poke around with it. let's explore a little bit. mr. livingston, if the students were to strike or if the athletics department or university were to lock the players out like you'd have at a steel mill, let's say, during the collective bargaining process, would the students be able to attend class? >> that's an unanswered question. the only experience we really have is in professional sports whereas the entire league that typically goes on strike or -- >> that's in professional sports. >> but in college because we don't have it, we don't know what would happen. >> because in college you have classes, right? >> would they be able to stay in their dorms? would they have to vacate those?

would they have to leave class or start paying for it? those are unanswered questions. >> right. certainly unanswered by the law or the regulations or anything else. mr. muir, northwestern is in the big ten conference, as you know, along with two schools in indiana, one being perdue in my district. purdue in my district. let's say northwestern student athletes were to unionize and proceed to either strike or be locked out, how would that affect the rest of the conference? using your knowledge and experience. >> you know, not being at northwestern, i don't know if it's appropriate for me to jump on that. >> no. i just say using your experience and knowledge, what do you think would happen? how do you feel? >> i think it would be difficult to continue to schedule and continue to have competition -- >> if stanford were in a similar situation, what would be the effects? >> i think if that was the case, stanford might not opt to continue to compete at the level that we're currently competing at. >> right. kind of to the comment made

earlier. my district also has st. josephs college which i'm proud to be a board member of. it's a division ii school. which, if i understand right, you can share scholarships at that level. between students, and there's limited funds. again, experience looking into your crystal ball, what would be the effect of division ii students with regard to this? >> if this -- again, i'm not a legal expert, but if this were, the students at division ii wanted to unionize as well too, i think that would dramatically effect whether institutions can continue to have these offerings which is part of the fabric of higher education. i think intercollegiate athletics. that would be a shame if that all of a sudden changed. >> yeah. these questions and your answers continue to bring clarity to me. i don't think this law was even intended for this kind of situation. mr. livingston? >> we're talking about

scholarships as if there's a guy night limit. the union would be able to bargain about the number and, of course, the value. so half scholarships versus full scholarships, it's all a subject of bargaining under the nlra. >> judge starr, coming to you, you know, we often talk about on this committee and in businesses across the nation and in union halls about the cost of unionization, the cost of bargaining, the cost of dues, etc., whether or not a union member should have to pay dues voluntarily or not have a choice in that. what do you think in your experience would be the cost of unionization for the employer and the employees? can you estimate cost of student athletes at baylor, for example? >> we've not punched through the numbers enough to even come up with a reasonable estimate. what we do know is that the whole idea of collective bargaining is, in fact, to increase the whole reservoir of

duly-agreed-upon commitments by the employer. so i think part of the question is what can we do outside of the collective bargaining which has never been contemplateed before that, in fact, improves student welfare. that you have rightly focused on. and the unionization process is raising a whole host of questions we can't answer today, but we do know the costs will, in fact, go up, including issues with respect to how is that student going to be treated as an employee in terms of taxation? medicare and the like. >> thank you. and that's a selling waw into my -- segway into my last question, and it's for you, judge starr. considering that the world's a jury, watching today people might get the impression that the acknowledgment that improvements need to be made is an acknowledgment that someone was caught or that this just started as a reaction to this recent decision. can you give us evidence otherwise via your testimony?

>> yes -- >> i'm sorry, judge, the gentleman's time has ebb expired. >> can the gentleman respond? >> gentleman's time has expired. mr. scott. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. schwartz, in many cases the scholarship requires you to play, in most cases? >> my understanding is until 2011 the ncaa mandated that the scholarship could only be for one year whether schools wanted to give one or not. if you stop playing during the course of that year, you were allowed to continue for that year after which the scholarship would not be renewed. the current deal -- >> some colleges you get a scholarship, and you can continue whether you play or not, isn't that right? if you have a needs-based scholarship? >> if you choose not to play football, the schools have the option to terminate the aid and at the end of that year. >> you indicated the number of

hours that had to be committed. is an athlete required to comply with that schedule? >> you know, in the nlrb hearing the facts that came out that weren't con controverted, it's , 50, 60-hour half a-week job during the season and about half that off season. >> can a student ever be, before the ruling, could a student ever be an employee of the college like if they worked at the laboratory, something hike that? the stanford daily's editor-in-chief makes about $45,000. football players -- >> now in that case is the students, is the status of a student, does that affect his status as an employee? >> no. student employees are mutually exclusive concepts for everybody else. >> and the part-time job could be an essential parking lot of the financial package. you've got a certain amount of scholarship, a loan, and we'll

take sure you get a part-time -- >> my roommate in college did just that. >> and it's unlikely that if you quit your job at the library, you'd lose the rest of your scholarship. that'd be a little unheard of, wouldn't it? >> i think that's right. lots of ways that students outside of sports can be compensated. as stanford there was a class that required students to sell an app on football. and to -- on facebook. and to commercialize it was part of the requirements of the class, and they got credit for doing that rather than, you know, losing. >> okay. now, is it possible that some student athletes would qualify as employees? >> my understanding is the ruling applies only to athletes who receive scholarship.

>> if you get a scholarship for the chess club or something or band and are not required to put in these kind of hours, you'd be a, i think would you -- a college athlete. >> that's right. and, actually, in the reverse history right now the chess team has more rights than college athletes because the chess team could say i want a college

scholarship that covers more than just the athletic scholarship. they have the right in the market to bargain, but football athletes don't. >> but it's possible under this ruling that some would qualify as employees and others would not. >> i think that's correct. >> mr. eilers, you indicated the issues of the right to scholarship, medical treatment, the right to minimize brain trauma and other situations like that, a union could engage these issues. if it's not the union, who would be in a bargaining position to engage these issues and have the resources actually to do the research and make a presentation on behalf of the athletes? >> mr. scott, as i said in my testimony, i don't have a solution. to me, it should be the ncaa and the member institutions, and it's clear and just to clarify what i think are some

misconceptions, schools operate differently. at notre dame, there is a significant incidence of a athlete who decided not to play football anymore. we honored his scholarship, he graduated with a degree in four years from the university of notre dame. there may be other schools that act differently. maybe at the university of iowa -- at ohio state they weren't. so there needs to be an elevation across all, i think, collegiate sports to make sure that we are delivering for the student. >> gentleman's time has expired. mrs. brooks. >> thank you, and thank you all for your testimony today, it's so very important. i'm the daughter of a high school football coach and the mother of a d i soccer graduate from xavier university who suffered a serious concussion in

high school in the last game of her high school career. and after wonderful medical treatment and proper healing, she went on to play four years of di soccer. now, many people and parents who are helping these athletes get scholarships which they all work so very hard in their lives to achieve those scholarships, parents advocate for these young people, the students advocate, the student-athlete advisory committee of the ncaa advocates, the -- i would assume -- the president of the universities and the representatives of each of the conferences that represent the ncaa on their board are advocates for these athletes. and i would submit that there are many avenues to rectify the problems, and there are continued problems for these college athletes. but these athletes make these

choices as to which schools to attend. one thing we haven't talked about enough is the role of the coaches in all of this process. and the coaches who are employees of the university who report to the athletic directors who report to the college presidents who report to the board of trustees, what mechanisms are there in your universities for the students to voice their concerns with the coaches and the coaches to voice their concerns to the administration? i'll start with you, judge starr. >> yes. we do have at baylor and it's frequently the case at most institutions that there is a student athletic council. so these are student athletes themselves who come together. they are elected by their fellow student athletes, and so they have direct access not similar to their coaches, but to the athletic director. they can also communicate with the faculty athletic representative who is to, in fact, bring an academic perspective to bear in terms of the entire athletic program including reviewing specific cases. so you're absolutely right,

there are numerous avenue t for voices to be heard. the final thing i would say is the ncaa itself, however, believes that in its governance historically, it has not done well in terms of assuring the student athlete voice. and so there are reforms underway that i think will be adopted that will, in fact, better insure that student athletes are there in the councils of the ncaa. >> thank you. mr. muir? >> yes, we have a number of opportunity toss hear from our student athletes and from our coaches. the student athlete council at stanford, the cardinal council, i just met with two weeks ago, and it's a chance for me to check in and hear their issues and concerns and how are we doing. also we survey all our student athletes after every season, and we provide feedback. they can do it anonymously, and we get information on just how their experience is going. also the coaches have an open-door policy. d look for that when we select

our coaches and the proper leadership. we think we have one of theç largest leadership development programs on our campus. and so that's another opportunity for student athletes to engage. we have administratorses, counselors, tutors all on a united front to make sure their experience is the best it can our student athletes to engage. >> is it fair to say that your coaches in paruç are judged and their success is younged in part on the graduation -- is judged in part on the graduation rates of their athletes? >> yeah. we look at a number of things, obviously, the graduation rates, what they're doing in the class z room and what they're doing to make sure they're solid citizens and a part of the university fabric which is what we talked about earlier. >> and i know there's always a tension when student athletes have to leave and may miss classes or tests or labs and so forth. but as judge starr indicated, there are faculty representatives, and there has to be that relationship with the faculty and the athletic department, does there not, in order to insure that those students take the tests, that they get the proper

reinforcement? and in addition, the study halls. i know my daughter, there were numerous study tables required of all student athletes in order to achieve certain gpas, and those were absolute requirements, that they must achieve a certain gpa to get out of study hallings. are you familiar with that, mr. eilers? >> i am. if you starletted and you didn't perform well, you got sent to study hall. today they default to everybody starts in study hall. and the only other thing i would comment, mrs. brooks, is that i am aware of institutionings that aren't at this table, but take academics and athletics seriously, and their coaches do have, do have provisions in their contract that if they don't graduate their student athletes, there are negative implications to their salary and to their career. >> thank you. my time has expired. >> i thank the gentlelady. mr. tierney. >> mr. eilers, i'm impressed

with the concern and the way that you sort of agree with the concerns, the goals of kappa, but you have a concern about unionization, but i want to point out here these concerns existed for decades. so i wish that you had an idea that you could -- [inaudible] what you would do if you wouldn't unionize, because it seems frustrating. mr. schwartz, these are not new problems, are they? >> no, not at all. as i said, the issue of cost of attendance stipends has been around since 1973 when by collective vote the ncaa took them away. >> so, and i agree with my colleague there are lots of advocates out there, but it apparently hasn't been very effective. they've been advocating all this time, and the problem still exists. >> well, it's a one-sided discussion. >> there was also a comment made that the student, the college athlete has choices. what would you say to that? >> you know, i'm advocating for a much more free market opportunity. i think choice would be great. congresswoman brooks mentioned that students have choice, but what they don't have a choice

about is the full package that they receive because the schools fix the price of what they offer. everyone offers the same thing, so it limits choice. >> so the ncaa seems to have $3.2 billion in revenues, but they can't address even five really basic issues except to say that it's coming soon. >> yeah. could i adjust one thing? the idea that this is a money-losing industry, you know, is incredible. if you look at a money-losing industry, you wouldn't see rising pay for employees, you wouldn't see firms flocking to enter the industry. nineteen new schools have entered since '96, none have left. you wouldn't see bonuses 10 to 1 for sports results instead of academic results. the money in the, is in the system, it's just that it's being denied to the primary generators. >> you made another point. you said that money is being

funneled to football coaches instead of to the male athlete and some coach gets paid $7 million on that. and when the money is going to coaches in lieu of increased financial aid to the male athletes, it sort of effectively puts a cap on that and then deprives female athletes of title ix matching funds. >> that's right. it doesn't apply to coaching pay. it applies to financial aid provided to students. and so if that aid is capped, which it is now, and even the ncaa says they wish it were higher, a lifting of that cap on male athletes would result in, effect effectively, matching funds to female athletes. >> mr. starr, i want to just go to some part of your testimony. i'm going to quote it, if you'll allow me. under current principles of title ix, the amount of financial aid awards for student athletes must be in the same proas the intercollegiate sports participation rate of male and females.

>> yes. >> but when i look at the data from the department of education web site, it shows that baylor spends 56 cents on male scholarships out of every dollar but only 44 clements on women's -- cents on women's scholarships. they should be giving something like 42 cents to men and 58 cents to women. there's a disparity of just one percentage point, you've got some explaining to do. i want to give you the opportunity to explain to us the disparity between the scholarship dollars that go to men and women and the participation rates -- >> well, that is a very dynamic and fluid process, so it may change from year to year. but if there is, in fact, a disparity -- and i accept what you've said -- it has to be addressed. so we have to come forward with explanations as to why there may be a temporary disparity. we recently created two new women's sports with scholarships in order to address the disparity. so we have, for example, created

equestrian with a number of scholarships for women. we have created acrobatics and tumbling -- >> you saying you believe this is a temporary issue? this is a year to year thing? are you saying that with some knowledge of the fact, or are you just guessing that's the case? >> well, i don't know the specifics of those, that specific disparity. so that is informs to me. what i do know is that the academic department, the athletic department does have to focus on this with our title ix compliance officer. we have a title ix compliance officer who reviews all these kinds of issues to determine -- >> i'm just disturbed, you know, the ncaa's the answer to all of these issues which most people agree ought to be addressed is wait for the next decade or two, and we might get around to it. and even the title ix questions is we are looking at it. mr. eilers? sure. >> could i just share a comment? i agree with you, and i have the same frustration. that's why i'm here today. i'd like to see this implemented.

and the one thing i didn't want to throw on the table at noter game, we used to open up against michigan, trying to prepare for class, i just couldn't conceive of trying to think about threatening to strike or getting to the friday night or saturday morning of the football game and not leafing the locker room -- leaving the locker room because demands weren't being met. i don't think the student athlete needs that incremental burden. >> apparently, they need to take some drastic action just to get the -- >> the gentleman's time -- >> i think we ought to at least acknowledge that. >> the gentleman's time has expired. mr. wahlburg. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thanks to the panel for being here. i didn't participate in a revenue sport. i was in an olympic sport, but wrestling in high school and college, university for the time that i did that was probably the best, best training for life that i ever had. and i did it out of the joy of the sport. i made it i be -- by choice.

suffered four shoulder surgeries as a result of that in later years of my life, but i look back, and i would do it all over again. i appreciate, also, the aspect that there has to be care taken for our athletes, and i respect what you've said about your concerns already on that. mr. muir, in your testimony you state stanford has taken steps to cover medical costs for injuries, promote player safety and researched prevention and effects of concussions. could you elaborate a little bit more on those steps, and are these consistent with ncaa rules? >> they are consistent with ncaa rules. we have our stanford medical team is right now doing a concussion study on our football student athletes, our soccer student athletes. what they've told me is this research is going to be lengthy and time -- we can't today say here's how we prevent that from happening, but certainly they're observing that. we have, they have a medical mouthpiece that they put in each

of the student athletes to track where blows come from, and certainly that's going to be an ongoing study for us, and they're lead anything that regard. across the board in terms of the overall welfare of our student athletes, that is something that we hold close and dear to us, and it's important that we try to enhance those things as we move forward with our student athletes competing at this level. >> do the student athletes understand this? are they made aware of opportunities, considerations, programs? >> they're testing, they're the ones who are wearing those mouthpieces, they're the ones who are getting educated on the risks that are involved and, certainly, what the research that we're trying to do. and there's, obviously, great discussion about what the future holds, and so that's something that they engage in, and i think it's been worthwhile to have this leadership role. >> well, along that line you state that stanford has taken steps to protect scholarship support for students who are medically disqualified from

playing. what are those steps? >> so, for example, we have three incoming football student athletes who have been awarded scholarships. they were not able to finish their senior year in competition. we still honored those scholarships, we're looking forward to them contributing once they're healthy, and we've had other student athletes who have gotten injured while at stanford that we still honor their scholarships at the end of the today, first and foremost, we're here to make sure they get their degree, and we will do everything in our power to make sure that happens aroundless of whether they continue to play or not. >> what about baylor? >> we do, in fact, care for our student athletes and football players. if they are, in fact, injured, the scholarship continues. and we also believe we have the moral obligation with respect to an injury sustained in football even post-graduation. >> notre dame, as far as you know, mr. eilers? >> [inaudible] pardon me. as far as i know, notre dame's

consistent with the other testimony. >> okay. mr. muir and mr. eilers, i'd like you to comment as well. this year it appears the ncaa will revisit the stipend issue. we've talked a bit about that. what is, what is the major concern with the stipend issue from your perspective as an athletic director? a major private university? >> so the major issue, i think, is that each institution is trying to pay up to the cost of attendance. that's the issue that's out there. that personal cost is different, and trying to figure out the exact number where we can at least try to be equitable. the other thing that mr. schwartz had mentioned as well is the resources that are, that would be necessary to provide that. not all schools are able to meet that cost of attendance, and it's a concern for them. or they'll have to make other decisions, and so that is a

difficult one, and that's why we spent so many years trying to figure that out. i do feel because of the discussion and dialogue that we're closer. we realize we need to enhance that overall experience, but it is difficult from school to school since there are so few that are truly making revenue that they're able to far exceed their expenses with revenue? it makes it hard. makes it difficult. i do think we're making progress, but it's going to take a little more time. >> mr. eilers? >> anecdotally, my parents -- i was fortunate -- were able to give me out-of-pocket expense money when i was on scholarship as noter -- at notre dame. by little brother was there, two years younger than me, became a college all-american, and i played with him my last year at the chicago bears, he came from a single-parent family, had no money, his mom couldn't afford it, you know? so it came down the poem, his teammates, you know, his mentors

to make sure that he could go out to dinner with us, you know, do laundry, etc., off campus if need be. and i just think that's wrong. >> yeah, yeah. had my first wrestling win at chicago vo to-tech. >> gentleman's time has expired. mr. byrne. >> thank you, gentleman. i am the former chancellor of postsecondary education for the state of alabama. i'm sorry, mr. eilers, don't hold that against me. [laughter] >> congratulations. >> i'm also a former labor lawyer who represented numerous clients in front of the national labor relations board with the national labor relations act on a number of cases. so this issue fascinates me. because i've dealt with it both ways. our two-year colleges, which is what the postsecondary education department in abdeels with, because have -- alabama abdeels with. bubba watson went on to the university of georgia, but he

started at an alabama two-year college, and we're very proud of him. but we're also very proud of all those student athletes, and the vast majority of them will never do what bubba does. but we hope that they come to us and get a good education. now, mr. muir, judge starr, you know, when we're dealing with students in that environment, they bring their life issues with them. they may be students, and they may be athletes, but they're also young people, and they have life issues, and we have coaches and counselors that deal with them on stuff that happens on the field and stuff that happens off the field. and you can't take 'em apart. they just come together like that. and i guess what bothers me about this whole issue -- and i want to share the concerns i've heard about the ncaa, by the way. i see that as a separate issue, frankly, and i think we're trying to use the wrong tool to get at some of those ncaa issuings. what concerns me is that if

>> and that carries through. not only the four years or five years that they're on campus, but we want them to have a relationship with us actually once they graduate and have the degree. that relationship so important to us and, yes, we do have they're able to come to someone here at the university setting, and that's the beauty of the college environment. and i think that's really important for us to keep in mind as we move forward. and, certainly, as we noted there's many issues that need to

be addressed, and i think we're going to work our way to getting those done. it's always evolving. >> i'd ask this question to legal counsel here. i mean, you've heard the vantage point of people who are dealing with these student athletes on things that go far beyond what happens in their actual athletic work if you want to call it work in this environment, is the nlra the right tool to deal with the issues that people seem to have with the ncaa -- and let me just say this, the ncaa doesn't even do two-year colleges. so we start creating a bigger definition of employee, it's going to affect a whole lot of people. not just people who are governed by the ncaa. so is the nlra the right tool to do? >> well, that's a great question, and one of the reasons why i don't think it applies, under the nlra, all employees have certain rights, and the policy that judge starr and

others have talked about based on recent nlrb decisions, they would clearly violate them. the coach is, requires his players to be a facebook friend. he, the schools monitor the pages. recent rules say that violates the rights of anyñë3/loyee, whether they're union or not. the framework we're talking about likely violates. it's just not the appropriate tool. >> gentleman's time has expired. on my agenda here it says we're to closing remarks, so i'm going to yield to the senior democratic member, mr. miller, for his closing remarks. mtl84d. chairman. i think this is a very important hearing. you know, america is in the throes of celebrating on a daily basis socially and economically every way possible entrepreneurs

and those who take risk. the list of grievances that these players presented is a list of grievances players could have presented five years ago and ten years ago across the college community, but they haven't been addressed. these players are put in the position of being on the edge all of the time, scholarship, no scholarship, play, don't play, classes, no classes. all of the time, that's a very interesting place to keep your employees that you care so much about. i think these players might play better if they had some more certainty in their life. but the ncaa doesn't let you do that as the university. we have some remarkable examples of universities and programs. you know you're not typical across the board. of high stakes football in this country. and we know the athletes are not typical. and the fact is you're graduating people, but we also have clusters of athletes that

go to certain classes for certain reasons that may not have, might apply toward their graduations, so they're short, but they stay eligible by taking the classes. i'm not holding you responsible, but we know this landscape. that's why the knight commission was set up, to look at the landscape. no easy create you -- critics of the industry. but the fact of the matter is this landscape has changed dramatically. i've been in congress long enough to know that when i've seen really tough issues on the academic side when they thought the congress might get involved, very often you don't meet the college president, you meet the college coach. and we know that the education journal, sports journal shows are constantly debating this question, who's the most powerful person on campus, the presidentover the coach? we know all hell can be paid for

the mishandling or hiring or firing of a coach. these, these concerns that these young men were willing to take a risk on exists on every campus. whether or not you have the security of a scholarship, for how long. whether or not you're going to have health insurance, whether or not you're -- what's going to happen to your injuries if you lose your scholarship? stipends, transfers. we've been over there. we've been over this and over this and over this. i think i held the first concussion hearings. no, no, no, this is not proper for public discussion. this is, this is a sport. this is volunteers. people play. until they start to see the extent of the damage done. i worked with many nfl coaches and players. we couldn't get to first base. i had coaches come and tell me the documents are here.

we know what's taking place here. well, finally the players associate went to court, and we know the rest is history. and that's just the beginning. but the fact of the matter is a determination was made that it was better to run the organization in a manner which which -- in which the owners wanted to run it than to deal with these issues. it's changed the way tv portrays it. they don't rerun those big hits because the audience has a different reaction today when they see that hit. they know that's a damaging hit. they know there's consequences to that. but before that it was highlights. but highlights now are liabilities. so we can have all the parade of horribles here about what could happen if there's unionization. why don't we think about what could happen if you took care of the problems of these student athletes and if the universities got back in control of this program and not the ncaa, not the conference? i understand there's got to be rules and regulations.

but, you know, we see arbitrary decisions made all the time by the ncaa. mr. courtney raised the issue. i remember talking to sports journalists about the issue. why are students who have nothing to do with the infraction losing their rights to play games? if you think you're going to the nba and you can't get in the playoffs where everybody's focused on your performance? that's a huge punishment. to, what, upholding some morality of their vision of football, and they're going to show that they're really tough on this school? >> well, they were tough when the infraction took place. so i think there's a lot to think about on the campuses. there's been a lot of time in this committee spent on higher ed and the approaches we take. and i think that you, you're or here because you're leaders in this field. you're not immune from this. this is the stanford daily that i asked to be put in, a list of easy classes that nobody knew exists, everybody said didn't

happen, and yet professor said, well, it upped my attendance, i'm glad it was on there. they come here, major ineligibility. i guess the senate's going to hear from -- [inaudible] on north carolina. i don't know if she's here or not. i think she was -- there you are. i think the senate, senator rockefeller and others are going to hear on this, and we've all been through these scandals before. so you can rail against the -- like the nfl, like the nba, you better address the problem. this is college sports, not ncaa. it's college sports. and i appreciate. i stood on the sidelines. i was so proud there, happened to be with a big donor of notre dame in los angeles and then in south bend. most exciting moment of my life, i never knew it could be that noisy, and i played a lot of football, but i never played at that level. so we know the influences here. we know the influences here.

there are student athletes. i don't think you treat the other students like this on campus. you know? i think somebody better get and take control of this situation again. and in most of the journals i read, the president is losing in this war against the coaches for the say and the standards on campus. mr. schwartz is right, this is like that cab in california. it's always coming, but it never arrives. the ncaa just can't make these decisions, and so we get these arbitrary actions against the institution and against the student and in some cases existence a coach now and then. -- against a coach now and then. there's a lot to think about here. i've been here 40 years. i've watched a lot of people deny their problems and blame and go after the symptom which in this case is a rational decision by these young people. there was no other outlet for them. no other outlet as there wasn't

for the people who preceded them. so i wouldn't be so concerned about whether or not they're going to vote, they're not going to go out on the field on saturday. that's not the makeup of these young men. you know? but i remember talking to bobby knight when the networks decided they needed a midweek game. and now we have it, you know, for different -- depends what conference you're in, how many days of school you miss. you can deep defending it -- keep defending it, i'd work on changing it. thank you very much, mr. chairman, for this hearing. >> i thank the gentleman. i want to thank the witnesses. a lot of expertise, real knowledge. i appreciate everything that you had to offer. quite a diversity in experiences and positions here. somebody who was a top-level college athlete and then went on to play in the nfl and has very strong feelings and opinions about these issues and has pointed out very eloquently,

mr. eilers, that we've got problems out there as mr. miller -- again, very passionately -- pointed out that need to be addressed. what brought this hearing together was the actions of a regional director of the national labor relations board who suggested that these athletes are employees and, therefore, could, if they chose, vote to join a union. and so we explored some of the possible downsides of that issue, and we heard from witnesses here that talked about how would this deal with class attendance and practice times, attending games, how many games, what about walk-on players, what about universities who are public and don't fall under the national labor relations act and a host, frankly, of potential problems. and we wanted to get out that, and i very much appreciate the testimony of the witnesses today as we start to explore that. i don't think there's a person

on this committee that doesn't agree that we need to address some of those very issues that we talked about and, again, that mr. eilers talked about so eloquently. the question is, is unionization of some sports, some players in some schools the appropriate tool to get to that end? i think i've been very clear to say that i don't think that it is, and we need to then focus on, i think, all of us perhaps in congress and certainly those of you in the field as it were as athletic directors and college presidents and those concerned to do the sorts of things that mr. miller was talking about. that we address these issues. i just don't believe that that sporadic unionization. and, no, i'm not arguing for a bigger bargaining unit there, mr. miller. i just think that the law is the

wrong law, it's the wrong tool to use here. [laughter] okay. there being no further business, the committee is adjourned. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> and the senate about to gavel in for the day starting their day with general speeches until about 5:30 p.m. eastern time when they'll be voting on two nominations, one for the 11th circuit court of appeals and the other for the energy department. senators will also be voting on whether to move ahead with debate on a bill promoting the energy efficiency. the chaplain retired admiral barry black will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. o god our strength, you have placed music in our hearts, helping us to carry our burdens by providing us with a future and hope. let your holy power renew ouse